AudioQuest NRG-X3 Review (AC Power Cord)

[DonR]

For some undecerning people, maybe?

My most humble apologies oh golden eared one. I'm done here.

 

[kencreten]

Well, I wouldn't really be an audiophile if I didn't already know about blind listening tests, for Christ sake!

Audiophile is not a term that is respected here as "someone who knows." Usually someone saying "I'm an audiophile" tells everyone here, that they don't understand how they cannot trust their own perceptions, scientifically. When someone says, "I'm an audiophile," the term in my head that pops up is, "audiophool."

 

[Beave]

For some undecerning people, maybe?

Or peepol who can't spell rite.

 

[kencreten]

For some undecerning people, maybe?

Go away. This is the territory of weak arguments, when someone starts putting people down. Get your ass out of here as far as I'm concerned. If you can't defend your audio claims, with something other than insults, you already lost. You'll find many sympathetic ears in audiophile forums, and get all kinds of warm fuzzies for claims that do not need proof, but not here. This isn't the place for you. And believe people when they tell you that many have come in here, just like you. If you want to get somewhere with us, nice stories about what you believe about audio - with no data, does nothing. Persisting in that, you don't belong here.

 

[Russell]

Tests only give true information if they are performed with discipline and under rigorous controls.

Not only that, but a group of people will reinforce each other's opinions by means of the power of suggestion.

That reminds me of another page you might do well to read:

List of cognitive biases - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Jim

Your missing what I'm saying with "magic." You believe your perceptions. Your perceptions are flawed in very specific ways, and yet, apparently, you are using these flawed systems you have, to "measure the performance of cable," and have come to believe what you think based on those perceptions. It is magical thinking to believe you can perceive the differences in cables without double blind testing. My guess is, you haven't done this testing to verify your beliefs.

I've been an audiophile for decades, so I know all about it, just because you maybe can't hear subtle differences, like most audiophiles can, doesn't mean you're right. You're in the minority, actually.

 

[amirm]

Ok I get what you're saying, but I'm talking from when I was 11 or 12 years of age to the present (57). Don't you think I haven't done every test that you can come up with, throughout the decades, on my own, and with other people?

I am confident that you haven't. Your comments clearly indicate so.

 

[xaviescacs]

without bias

Do you know what bias is?

 

[amirm]

I've been an audiophile for decades, so I know all about it, just because you maybe can't hear subtle differences, like most audiophiles can, doesn't mean you're right. You're in the minority, actually.

You can be an audiophile for a million years. It won't change the fact that you are not aware of how your perception works. Conduct the simple test I talked about and then report back. Until then, you are saying things we hear every day of the week and twice on Sunday. And oh, we all perceive the same differences you talk about. We know those perceptions are faulty. You don't.

 

[Russell]

Go away. This is the territory of weak arguments, when someone starts putting people down. Get your ass out of here as far as I'm concerned. If you can't defend your audio claims, with something other than insults, you already lost. You'll find many sympathetic ears in audiophile forums, and get all kinds of warm fuzzies for claims that do not need proof, but not here. This isn't the place for you. And believe people when they tell you that many have come in here, just like you. If you want to get somewhere with us, nice stories about what you believe about audio - with no data, does nothing. Persisting in that, you don't belong here.

Lighten up Mr Angry, my comment is hardly nasty.

 

[Russell]

You can be an audiophile for a million years. It won't change the fact that you are not aware of how your perception works. Conduct the simple test I talked about and then report back. Until then, you are saying things we hear every day of the week and twice on Sunday. And oh, we all perceive the same differences you talk about. We know those perceptions are faulty. You don't.

Well, we'll agree to disagree.

 

[Beave]

Well, we'll agree to disagree.

Is that a polite way of declining to do a controlled (double-blind) comparison?

 

[Beave]

and I kid you not, there was a completely different presentation of the sound. I get goosebumps when something changes for the better. This cable, compared to my upgraded Samsung stock cable, was immediately satisfyingly and jaw droppingly better.

I've been an audiophile for decades, so I know all about it, just because you maybe can't hear subtle differences, like most audiophiles can, doesn't mean you're right. You're in the minority, actually.

So it was "jaw droppingly better" or it was "subtle differences?"

 

[Russell]

Tests only give true information if they are performed with discipline and under rigorous controls.

Not only that, but a group of people will reinforce each other's opinions by means of the power of suggestion.

That reminds me of another page you might do well to read:

List of cognitive biases - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Jim

Your missing what I'm saying with "magic." You believe your perceptions. Your perceptions are flawed in very specific ways, and yet, apparently, you are using these flawed systems you have, to "measure the performance of cable," and have come to believe what you think based on those perceptions. It is magical thinking to believe you can perceive the differences in cables without double blind testing. My guess is, you haven't done this testing to verify your beliefs.

I've been an audiophile for decades, so I know all about it, just because you maybe can't hear subtle differences, like most audiophiles can, doesn't mean you're right. You're in the minority, actually.

Audiophile is not a term that is respected here as "someone who knows." Usually someone saying "I'm an audiophile" tells everyone here, that they don't understand how they cannot trust their own perceptions, scientifically. When someone says, "I'm an audiophile," the term in my head that pops up is, "audiophool."

That's your opinion.
If you're into hifi, you're an audiophile by default. So if it's not liked, on here, it's probably just you and a few other people.

 

[Russell]

So it was "jaw droppingly better" or it was "subtle differences?"

Both, throughout my hifi life.

 

[Beave]

But only when doing sighted listening comparisons. No surprise there.

 

[amirm]

Well, we'll agree to disagree.

Nope:

 

[Sal1950]

Nope:

2 thumbs up,

We bought him books, sent him to school, and what did he do?
Kick the teacher.

 

[kencreten]

I am confident that you haven't. Your comments clearly indicate so.

I've been an audiophile for decades, so I know all about it, just because you maybe can't hear subtle differences, like most audiophiles can, doesn't mean you're right. You're in the minority, actually.

That's your opinion.
If you're into hifi, you're an audiophile by default. So if it's not liked, on here, it's probably just you and a few other people.

You're talking in the wind here, so I hope you'll stop soon. When you have data for your claims, come on back.

 

[Blumlein 88]

So it was "jaw droppingly better" or it was "subtle differences?"

Well some component was pissing all over the system (component being cable) and then jaws dropped. I can tell you this guy is wrong. How? Using his criteria, I have been doing all this longer than he has, and more than he has. See, he's wrong, I just told you why.

 

[kencreten]

You're talking in the wind here, so I hope you'll stop soon. When you have data for your claims, come on back.

Both, throughout my hifi life.

What about... cedar overtones? heheh